Re: Etags support for the Mercury programming language [continued]

[Francesco Potortì]

>You will note an unconventional move.  I was daring enough to add two 
>options to 'etags' (-m and -M) to implement some kind of backward 
>compatibility with Prolog etags support (based on tagging definitions, 
>-M) while allowing a simpler, more idiomatic approach that focuses on 
>tagging  Mercury declarations only (-m).  Backward compatibility is 
>legitimate and quite useful, but having it on board all the time may be 
>cumbersome for some use cases.   Hence the 'behavioral' options I added.

I fear this is too intrusive, but easy to amend.

Instead of -M, youi should use --declarations

Instead of -m, you should use --no-defines

In both cases, the description of the options should be augmented with
their Mercury use.